Categories
Berkeley Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Colorado Columbia Cornell Duke Economist Market Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota North Carolina Northwestern NYU Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Purdue Rochester Salaries Stanford Texas Vanderbilt Virginia Wisconsin Yale

Assistant Professors’ Salaries in U.S. Economics Departments (3), 1964/5-1965/66

 

 

This is the third table from the so-called “Cartel” summary report from December 1965 of 9-10 month salaries paid in U.S. economics departments. Tables 3c give figures for the distribution of assistant professor salaries across the departments reporting. Last posting gave the distribution for full-professors and the distribution for associate professors. The next posting has the distribution for entering salaries for new Ph.D.’s. Refer to the first posting in this series of tables for information about the compiler Professor Francis Boddy of the University of Minnesota and a list of the 30 departments belonging to the Chairmen’s Group.

Also there is a table of the anticipated (as of December 1965) range of salaries to hire freshly completed PhD’s for the coming academic year, 1966-67.

Using the BLS web CPI Inflation calculator, one can inflate nominal levels (say for December 1965, the date of the report) to April 2017 using a factor of 7.69.

____________________

TABLE 3c
ASSISTANT PROFESSORS 1965-66, 1964-65

(1)
Median Salaries
All Assistant Professors

MID-POINT
OF RANGE

1965-66 1964-65
Over 11,249 0

1

11,000

0 0
10,500 3

0

10,000

7 1
9,750 2

0

9,500

6 6
9,250 3

2

9,000

4 5
8,750 1

6

8,500

1 2
8,250 1

3

8,000

1 2
7,750 0

0

7,500

0 0
7,250 0

1

N=

29 29
Median $9,500

$8,900

Mean

$9,402

$8,936

 

 

TABLE 3c
ASSISTANT PROFESSORS 1965-66, 1964-65

(2)
Average Salaries
“Superior Assistance Professors”
(Top 1/3)

MID-POINT
OF RANGE

1965-66 1964-65
Over 11,249 4

1

11,000

3 2
10,500 8

5

10,000

7 3
9,750 2

2

9,500 3 4
9,250 0

3

9,000

1 3
8,750 1

3

8,500

0 0
8,250 0

2

8,000

0 0
7,750 0

0

7,500

0 0
7,250 0

1

N=

 

29

 

29

Median $10,250

$9,500

Mean

$10,333

$9,575

 

 

TABLE 3c
ASSISTANT PROFESSORS 1965-66, 1964-65

(3)
Average Salaries
“Average Assistant Professors”
(Lower 2/3)

MID-POINT
OF RANGE

1965-66 1964-65
Over 10,749 0

1

10,500

1 0
10,000 5

0

9,750

2 0
9,500 4

3

9,250 7 1
9,000 2

8

8,750

4 3
8,500 1

5

8,250

2 3
8,000 1

1

7,750

0 2
7,500 0

1

7,250

0 1
N= 29

29

Median

$9,300 $8,800
Mean $9,251

$9,063

 

Source: Johns Hopkins University. The Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy, Series 5, Box 6, Folder 2 “Statistical Information”.

Image Source: Brussells conference, cartel magnate (detail). Postcard from 1902. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C. 20540 USA.

Categories
Berkeley Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Colorado Columbia Cornell Duke Economist Market Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota North Carolina Northwestern NYU Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Purdue Rochester Salaries Stanford Texas Vanderbilt Virginia Wisconsin Yale

Associate Professors’ Salaries in U.S. Economics Departments (2), 1964/5-1965/66

 

This is the second table from the so-called “Cartel” summary report from December 1965 of 9-10 month salaries paid in U.S. economics departments. Tables 2c give figures for the distribution of associate professor salaries across the departments reporting. Last posting gave the distribution for full-professors. Future postings include the actual salary distributions for assistant professors and freshly completed PhD’s 1964/65 and 1965/66. Refer to the first posting in this series of tables for information about the compiler Professor Francis Boddy of the University of Minnesota and a list of the 30 departments belonging to the Chairmen’s Group.

Also there is a table of the anticipated (as of December 1965) range of salaries to hire freshly completed PhD’s for the coming academic year, 1966-67.

Using the BLS web CPI Inflation calculator, one can inflate nominal levels (say for December 1965, the date of the report) to April 2017 using a factor of 7.69.

____________________

TABLE 2c
ASSOCIATE PROFESSORS 1965-66, 1964-65

(1)
Median Salaries
All Associate Professors

MID-POINT
OF RANGE
1965-66 1964-65
Over 13,749 3 0
13,500 2 0
13,000 2 1
12,500 6 3
12,000 5 2
11,500 4 3
11,000 3 11
10,500 2 4
10,000 0 0
9,750 0 1
9,500 0 2
N= 27 27
Median $12,000 $11,000
Mean $12,173 $11,093

 

 

TABLE 2c
ASSOCIATE PROFESSORS 1965-66, 1964-65

(2)
Average Salaries
“Superior Associate Professors”
(Top 1/3)

MID-POINT
OF RANGE
1965-66 1964-65
Over 16,249 0 1
16,000 1 0
15,500 1 0
15,000 2 0
14,500 2 0
14,000 5 2
13,500 6 4
13,000 4 6
12,500 3 3
12,000 0 4
11,500 1 3
 [sic, cell empty] 1 2
 [sic, cell empty] 0 1
N= 26 26
Median $13,000 $12,186
Mean $13,082 $12,159

 

 

TABLE 2c
ASSOCIATE PROFESSORS 1965-66, 1964-65

(3)
Average Salaries
“Average Assoc Professors”
(Lower 2/3)

MID-POINT
OF RANGE
1965-66 1964-65
14,500 0 0
14,000 1 0
13,500 0 0
13,000 4 1
12,500 4 1
12,000 2 2
11,500 3 2
11,000 7 8
10,500 3 4
10,000 2 4
9,750 0 1
9,500 0 2
9,250 0 0
9,000 0 0
8,750 0 1
8,500 0 0
N= 26 26
Median $11,265 $10,775
Mean $11,640 $10,760

 

Source: Johns Hopkins University. The Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy, Series 5, Box 6, Folder 2 “Statistical Information”.

Image Source: “The monopolists’ may-pole” by F. Opper.  Centerfold of Puck, vol. 17, no. 425 (April 29, 1885). Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C. 20540 USA.

Categories
Berkeley Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Colorado Columbia Cornell Duke Economist Market Economists Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota North Carolina Northwestern NYU Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Purdue Rochester Salaries Stanford Texas Vanderbilt Virginia Wisconsin Yale

Professors’ salaries in U.S. economics departments (1), 1964/5-1965/66

 

 

From my March 2017 expedition to the Johns Hopkins University archives’ collection of material from the Department of Political Economy, I came across one of those documents that help to provide an empirical baseline for the history of the market for economics professors. It is worth savouring the sets of tables one by one. In all, this so-called “cartel” summary with information collected from 29 departments in October 1965 consists of eight sets of tables.

On the last page of this summary for full-professor salaries can be found the name of the presumable compiler of the tables: Francis M. Boddy, Graduate School, University of Minnesota. It is dated December 21, 1965.

Two documents later in the same folder I found the list of 30 members of the Chairmen’s Group, dated December 13, 1965. With 29 responses to the salary questionnaire from which the “cartel” data have been assembled, it leaves only to guess which department did not report back to the “cartel”. I do believe that the ironic self-designation of cartel is not entirely contrary to functional fact here.

The salary distributions across the participating departments for associate professors, assistant professors, and for the starting salaries for newly minted Ph.D. hires have been posted in the meantime. Also there is a table of the anticipated (as of December 1965) range of salaries to hire freshly completed PhD’s for the coming academic year, 1966-67.

Using the BLS web CPI Inflation calculator, one can inflate nominal levels (say for December 1965, the date of the report) to April 2017 using a factor of 7.69.

___________________________________

About Francis M. Boddy

Boddy, Francis M, 1115 Bus. Admin., West Bank, Dept. of Econs., U. of Minn., Minneapolis, MN 55455. Phone: Office (612)373-3583;Home (612)926-1063. Fields: 020, 610. Birth Yr: 1906. Degrees: B.B.A., U. of Minn., 1930; M.A., U. of Minn., 1936; Ph.D., U. of Minn., 1939. Prin. Cur. Position: Prof. Emer. Of Econs., U. of Minn. At Twin Cities. 1975-. Concurrent/Past Positions: Acting Exec. Secy., Bd. Of Investment, State of Minn., 1978-79; Assoc. Dean of Grad. Sch. U. of Minn., 1961-73.

Source: “Biographical Listing of Members.” The American Economic Review 71, no. 6 (1981): p. 67.

___________________________________

Research Hint:
Boddy’s data go back to 1957/58

“I have, over the past six years, conducted an informal survey of some 30 of the leading departments of economics in the country, defined largely as being those departments which have been major producers of Ph.D.’s in economics.”

Source:  Boddy, Francis M. “The Demand for Economists.” The American Economic Review 52, no. 2 (1962): 503-08.

 

Also of interest from about the same time is the AER Supplement:

Tolles, N. Arnold, and Emanuel Melichar. “Studies of the Structure of Economists’ Salaries and Income” The American Economic Review 58, no. 5 (1968):

___________________________________

MEMBERS OF THE CHAIRMEN’S GROUP, 1965-66
December 13, 1965

  1. Professor Gerard Debreu
    University of California
    Berkeley, California 94720
  2. Dean R. M. Cyert
    Carnegie Institute of Technology
    Pittsburgh 13, Pennsylvania
  3. Professor Arnold C. Harberger
    University of Chicago
    1126 East 59th Street
    Chicago 37, Illinois
  4. Professor Carl McGuire
    University of Colorado
    Boulder, Colorado
  5. Professor William Vickrey
    Columbia University
    New York 27, New York
  6. Professor Douglas F. Dowd
    Acting Chairman
    Cornell University
    Ithaca, New York
    (Professor Frank H. Golay, the Chairman, is on leave in 1965-66.)
  7. Professor Robert S. Smith
    Duke University
    Durham, North Carolina
  8. Professor John Dunlop
    Harvard University
    Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138
  9. Professor John F. Due
    University of Illinois
    Urbana, Illinois 61803
  10. Professor George Wilson
    Indiana University
    Bloomington, Indiana 47405
  11. Professor Karl A. Fox
    Iowa State University
    Ames, Iowa 50010
  12. Professor Carl F. Christ
    Johns Hopkins University
    Baltimore, Maryland
  13. Professor Robert F. Lanzilotti
    Michigan State University
    East Lansing, Michigan
  14. Professor Warren L. Smith
    University of Michigan
    Ann Arbor, Michigan
  15. Professor E. Cary Brown
    Massachusetts Institute of Technology
    Cambridge 39, Massachusetts
  16. Professor Emanuel Stein
    New York University
    New York 3, New York
  17. Professor John Turnbull
    University of Minnesota
    Minneapolis, Minnesota
  18. Professor Ralph W. Pfouts
    university of North Carolina
    Chapel Hill, North Carolina
  19. Professor Robert Eisner
    Northwestern University
    Evanston, Illinois
  20. Professor Paul G. Craig
    Ohio State University
    Columbus, Ohio
  21. Professor Irving B. Kravis
    University of Pennsylvania
    Philadelphia 4, Pennsylvania
  22. Professor Richard A. Lester
    Princeton University
    Princeton, New Jersey
  23. Dean Emanuel T. Weiler
    Purdue University
    Lafayette, Indiana
  24. Professor Lionel McKenzie
    University of Rochester
    Rochester 20, New York
  25. Professor Edward S. Shaw
    Stanford University
    Stanford, California
  26. Professor Carey Thompson
    University of Texas
    Austin, Texas
  27. Professor James W. McKie
    Vanderbilt University
    Nashville, Tennessee
  28. Professor Alexandre Kafka
    Acting Chairman
    University of Virginia
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    (Professor Warren Nutter, the Chairman, is on leave in 1965-66.)
  29. Professor David B. Johnson
    University of Wisconsin
    Madison, Wisconsin
  30. Professor Raymond Powell
    Yale University
    New Haven, Connecticut

 

Source: Johns Hopkins University. The Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy, Series 5, Box 6, Folder 2 “Statistical Information”.

 

___________________________________

 

CARTEL
SUMMARY of the October-1965 Questionnaire to Departments of Economics in the United States

SUMMARY of the salary (1965-66 and 1964-65 academic years, 9-10 month basis) and other data of 29 (out of 29) Departments of Economics. N = Number of Departments reporting.

 

TABLE 1c
PROFESSORS 1965-66, 1964-65

(1)
Median Salaries
All Professors

MID-POINT
OF RANGE

1965-66

1964-65

Over 20,249

2 1
20,000 4

0

19,500

0 1
19,000 3

1

18,500

2 3
18,000 2

1

17,500

3 1
17,000 2

4

16,500

2 4
16,000 1

4

15,500

2 0
15,000 2

1

14,500

0 2
14,000 3

1

13,500

0 1
13,000 1

4

N=

29 29
Median $17,500

$16,500

Mean

$17,377

$16,319

 

 

TABLE 1c
PROFESSORS 1965-66, 1964-65

(2)

Average Salaries
“Superior Professors”
(Top 1/3)

MID-POINT
OF RANGE

1965-66

1964-65

Over 23,749

3 1
23,500 2

0

23,000

0 0
22,500 3

0

22,000

1 2
21,500 4

3

21,000

1 2
20,500 4

2

20,000

0 3
19,500 2

2

19,000

2 4
18,500 1

0

18,000

3 1
17,500 1

2

17,000

0 0
16,500 2

1

16,000

0 4
15,500 0

1

15,000

0 0
14,500 0

1

14,000

0 0
N= 29

29

Median

$20,600 $19,500
Mean $20,677

$19,093

 

 

TABLE 1c
PROFESSORS 1965-66, 1964-65

(3)

Average Salaries
“Average Professors”
(Lower 2/3)

MID-POINT
OF RANGE

1965-66

1964-65

Over 18,749

4 2
18,500 0

1

18,000

3 1
17,500 1

1

17,000

3 1
16,500 3

2

16,000

5 8
15,500 1

4

15,000

2 1
14,500 1

1

14,000

2 0
13,500

2

2

13,000

1 4
12,500 1

0

12,000

0 1
11,500 0

0

N=

29 29
Median $16,100

$15,390

Mean

$16,192

$15,119

 

Source: Johns Hopkins University. The Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy, Series 5, Box 6, Folder 2 “Statistical Information”.

Image: From left to right: Monopolies, Uncle Sam, Trusts.

Taylor, Charles Jay, Artist. In the hands of his philanthropic friends / C.J. Taylor. , 1897. N.Y.: Published in Puck, March 10, 1897. . Retrieved from the Library of Congress, . (Accessed May 12, 2017). https://www.loc.gov/item/2012647652/

Categories
Agricultural Economics Economists Harvard

Harvard. Memorial Minute for Agricultural Economist, J. D. Black, 1960

 

 

John Kenneth Galbraith was the chairman of a committee commissioned to write a faculty minute in honor of John D. Black (1883-1960) who taught courses in the economics of agriculture at Harvard from 1927 through 1959. Anyone familiar with Galbraithian prose can see that this minute was overwhelmingly, if not exclusively, the work of Galbraith. I do not think it an exaggeration to see in Galbraith’s praise of this or that aspect of Black’s career and scholarly style a projection of Galbraith’s own creed for academic life. Admiration, gratitude (Black pushed hard to get Galbraith promoted to a full professorship at Harvard), and affection all shine through this memorial minute, a genuine positive outlier in the art of the obituary.

Willard W. Cochrane wrote a profile “Remembering John D. Black” that was published in Choices (Magazine published by the Agricultural & Applied Economics Association in the 1st Quarter 1989 issue) pp. 31-32.

______________________

FACULTY OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

At a meeting of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences on October 18, 1960, the following minutes were placed upon the records.

JOHN DONALD BLACK

John D. Black, Henry Lee Professor of Economics, was the nation’s leading student of the economics of agriculture, and, to a greater extent than any other man, he gave the modern dimension and form to this branch of economics. His books, monographs, and papers were more widely and attentively read than those of any other scholar in the field; he was a premier source of ideas and a leader in research; his students have held and still hold a large proportion of the professorships in this subject; they have been equally influential in the United States Department of Agriculture and influential also in the colleges and departments of agriculture in foreign countries; and Black himself had a marked influence on the agricultural legislation passed in 1933 and thereafter. The price paid for milk in this community is set in accordance with a complex formula devised by Black. Not the least of his achievements was to make Harvard, an institution with no very intimate ties to farming, a major center during his lifetime of agricultural research and instruction.

Black’s first interest in life was as a teacher of advanced students — students who would find their career in one or another branches of his subject. His teaching had little style; preparation was at best an afterthought. But his students soon came to realize that they were, incomparably, the most important people in his life. They could count, literally, on his unlimited time and his impersonal but equally unlimited affection. And they discovered that beneath his formless lecturing were solid theoretical premises, a strong scientific attitude, and a profound contempt for anything suggestive of cant or pretense. He was immensely tolerant of students of average ability and was content if they became, in his hands, a little better than average. But he rejoiced in his good students and saw in all their achievements his own. Black’s students were his students for life. He knew them all by name; he expected to be consulted when they changed jobs; and he liked to be informed on their personal life. He was deeply concerned with the quality of instruction in agricultural economics not alone at Harvard but throughout the country. High level instruction he identified, not inaccurately, with this own students. So for many years he carried with him a small black book containing a list of former students and in his mind a list of college and university departments where he felt his influence could be enhanced. A vacancy in any of these institutions led promptly to a recommendation of a man who could be counted upon to extend what he did not hesitate to call “the Black point of view.”

Though subordinate in its claim on his time (during his nearly thirty years at Harvard his door was always open to students from nine until five) Black’s research and writing was of first importance and was prodigious in volume. His Production Economics, published in 1926, though unfinished in some respects, was a landmark in the development of the production function and in the theory of the competitive firm. It led Black to develop an entirely new approach to farm management research and instruction, one that reflected far more adequately the conceptual character of the farm firm and which in time largely supplanted the older methods based on comparative accounting data. Marketing, agricultural co-operation land tenure, land economics, price analysis, forestry, population theory, food and nutrition, farm labor, and national policy were among the subjects which engaged his attention at one period or another. A selection from his writings published last year by the Harvard University Press was from nearly three hundred books, papers, pamphlets, congressional submissions, reports, and manuscripts. Black had little patience with refinement in economic theory or method; he made no effort to conceal his opinion that much discussion of finer points was pretentious nonsense. He spoke often of the need to “open up a subject”—to initiate investigation and to offer the preliminary findings. This repeatedly he did. The results were never well formed or polished. But they were always supremely relevant, and they usually paved the way for the more detailed efforts of less original men.

Throughout his life Black was a trusted adviser on a wide range of matters concerning agricultural policy. He could not be readily typed either as a liberal or as a conservative. But he was sympathetic and pragmatic. He mistrusted the men who resolved matters on general theoretical grounds, and he was profoundly interested in results. Thus during the thirties, when many economists opposed the farm legislation of the period as an improper interference with the free market, Black was concerned only with how it might be made to work. Similarly on other matters. As a result, he was called on constantly by a succession of Secretaries of Agriculture, by agricultural officials, farm leaders, congressional committees and, especially in recent years, by foreign governments.

John Donald Black was born in 1883 in the log house on the original family homestead in Cambridge, Wisconsin. He was fourth in a family of talented children — one that include three teachers, a distinguished chemist, and a leading businessman. Black made his way through normal school, became a high school teacher of algebra, botany, and physical geography and the coach of the high school athletic teams. With earnings from teaching, he proceeded to the University of Wisconsin and to a degree in English. He taught English first at Western Reserve University and then for four years at the Michigan College of Mines (as it then was) on the upper Michigan peninsula. This latter college was in a raw and bitter community; in the neighboring copper mines bitterness and strife were endemic. He became impressed, especially after a long strike in 1915, with the urgency of the social problems. It seems likely, also, that he had become increasingly less impressed by the urgency or even the feasibility of teaching English grammar to these engineers for, in any case, he had begun to smuggle economics into his courses in the form of assignments in English composition. But on returning to study labor economics at a University of Wisconsin summer school, his attention was caught by the fledgling work in farm economics of Henry C. Taylor. He turned to this subject and took his Ph.D. degree with a thesis on land tenure in Wisconsin. On completion of his degree in 1918, he went to the University of Minnesota. His academic progress there may well serve as a model for the ambitious young scholar. He was assistant professor for six months, associate professor for two years, and the head of his department from the beginning.

In the ensuing ten years, the University of Minnesota became by far the most interesting center for research and discussion of the social problems of agriculture in the United States. A brilliant group of scholars gathered to work with Black. From them came a striking series of pamphlets and monographs — those on empirical methods and the nature of market supply responses were especially noteworthy. Before long, Black had a disproportionate share of both graduate students and budget — a development which he never found it in his heart to deplore.

By the late twenties his work was widely known and, at the behest of Thomas Nixon Carver, he was invited to visit Harvard for a term. This he did in 1927, and the visit was soon followed by an offer of a professorship. Now the students came to Cambridge instead of St. Paul. Few of them had funds to afford Harvard tuition, and by an incredible exercise of energy and resourcefulness Black found them money with which to study and do research. In 1929 and the years following the Social Science Research Council awarded one hundred twenty scholarships to improve the level of teaching and research in agricultural economics and rural sociology. Of the recipients, no fewer than forty-five came to Harvard to work with Black. In some subsequent years as many as a quarter of all the students in economics belonged to what came to be called “the Black Empire.”

In 1917 Black married Nina Van Steenberg, a woman of serene good humor and keen intelligence who, with their three children — Guy, Margaret, and Alan — survives him. The Black house in Belmont was for hundreds of graduate students nearly as much a part of Harvard as were his rooms in Widener or (later on) in Littauer. Black, to the wonder of all who knew him, worked prodigiously, imperturbably, and without evident strain. The serenity, charm, and quiet good humor of his household is surely a part of the explanation.

In his relations to colleagues and university, Black was the epitome of the inner-directed man. His view of what he needed and wanted was extremely clear. Since, in the end, it invariably prevailed, the Department eventually adopted the wise course of acceding to his wishes at the outset. Where he found university rules inconvenient, he unhesitantly ignored them. The rule that members of the faculty, though sound in body and mind, should retire at some specified age, struck him as especially absurd. He continued to teach until last December when he was seventy-six. He had a certain quiet pride in the devices by which he accomplished this defeat of authority, and it was his belief that no one in the modern history of the university had approached his record.

Black was an early President of the American Farm Economic Association and one of the life Fellows of that organization. He had a founding role in the organization of the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, and in 1955 he was President of the American Economic Association.

Last January he was stricken by the first of a series of severe heart attack. He died on April 12.

Edward S. Mason
Arthur Smithies
John Kenneth Galbraith, Chairman.

 

Source: Harvard University Gazette, Vol. LVI, No. 7 (October 29, 1960), p. 36-8. Copy in the Papers of John Kenneth Galbraith (Box 527), John F. Kennedy Presidential Library.

Image Source: Harvard University. Class Album 1945.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Final exam from theory of production and distribution. Haberler and Leontief, 1942

 

 

According to my reckoning, I have now matched final examinations that I have recently copied at the Harvard archives to as many previously posted course syllabi/outlines/reading assignments as I could to date. Of course the pairings of exams to course outlines are not complete, but quite a few are and more will be coming in the future!

An outline with a list of items to be read for an intermediate/advanced undergraduate economic theory of distribution course jointly taught by Gottfried Haberler and Wassily Leontief has already been posted earlier. Below I have transcribed the final examination questions for Haberler and Leontief’s second term course from 1941-42. 

 

_____________________________

Final Examination
Theory of Production and Distribution of National Income
Professor Haberler and Associate Professor Leontief

1941-42
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

ECONOMICS 1b

Answer ONE question in EACH of the four following groups:

(a) 1, 2, or 3
(b) 4 or 5
(c) 6 or 7
(d) 8 or 9

  1. Compare the theory of time wages with that of piece wages.
  2. Describe the circumstances in which the introduction of a minimum wage law can increase the demand for labor.
  3. Compare the Keynesian theory of wages with that of the “orthodox” economists and indicate the implications of the difference existing between the two for the general theory of employment.
  4. How does an entrepreneur determine the amount of capital which can be most profitably invested in a single plant?
  5. Compare the expected future change in the price level with the prevailing rate of interest in its effect upon the amount of the present individual savings.
  6. Discuss the difference between the marginal social and marginal private product from the point of view of the efficient organization of production.
  7. “An economic system can be unjust but efficient, it can also be just but inefficient.” Discuss.
  8. Analyze Professor Schumpeter’s theory of “zero interest” in a static economy.
  9. “A negative circumstance such as uncertain cannot possibly explain the existence of profit which is a positive return.” Discuss

Final, 1942.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University. Final Examinations, 1853-2001 (HUC 7000.28, Box 6 of 284). Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Papers Printed for Final Examinations: History, History of Religions, … , Economics, … , Military Science, Naval Science, June, 1942.

Image Source: Gottfried Haberler (left) and Wassily Leontief (right) from Harvard Class Album 1942.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Final exam for transportation economics. Chamberlin, 1932

 

 

Every year from 1927/28 through 1931/32, Edward Chamberlin taught a semester-long course on the economics of transportation. The course outline with reading assignments was posted earlier. This posting provides us with a short course description published in the annual announcements of the Division of History, Government, and Economics, 1929-30, followed by the final examination questions for the last time Chamberlin taught economics of transportation.

_____________________________

 

Course Description [1929-30]

[Economics] 4a 1hf. Economics of Transportation

Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., Sat., at 11. Asst. Professor Chamberlin

An historical outline will be followed in turn by discussion of the problems in rates, finance, and legislation, domestic and foreign.

 

Source: Harvard University. Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XXVI, No. 36 (June 27, 1929). Division of History, Government, and Economics 1929-30, p. 67.

_____________________________

 

Final Examination
Economics of Transportation
Assistant Professor Edward H. Chamberlin

1931-32
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

ECONOMICS 4a

I

(One hour)

Choose the question relating to the reading period assignment which you have read.

  1. (Waterways.) Write on the St. Lawrence Navigation and Power Project as an agency for: (a) agricultural relief; (b) the relief of traffic congestion; and (c) railway rate control. Do you think the project is economically justified?
  2. (Rates.) Explain, illustrate, and contrast the equalization and the distance principles in rate making. What new light is thrown on the problem of rates by Clark’s analysis of railway costs?
  3. (Valuation.) The “final value” of the Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac railroad has been announced by the Interstate Commerce Commission since the Supreme Court decision in the St. Louis and O’Fallon case, and the Commission has begun recapture proceedings against the road. The case may soon be appealed to the Supreme Court. On purely economic grounds, what basis of valuation do you think the Commission should have adopted? How, if at all, would your answer be different, taking into account legal reasons, especially in light of the O’Fallon decision?

 

II

The Act of 1920 provided that the Interstate Commerce Commission should have the power (a) to fix minimum rates; (b) to establish just divisions of joint rates; and (c) to permit pooling. Explain briefly the importance of each of these provisions.

 

III

Is there a need for regulation of motor transport (a) to protect the public from unfair rates? (b) to protect the railroads from unfair competition? Why or why not in each case?

 

IV

Hearings are now being held in Washington on the consolidation of all the railroads in trunk line territory into four large systems. What advantages and disadvantages may accrue (a) to the individual railroads concerned, and (b) to the public, if the project is approved by the Commission and carried through?

 

V

Write briefly on TWO of the following

  1. The significance of the back haul in railroad rate making.
  2. The importance of the ratio of stocks to bonds in railroad finance.
  3. Railway consolidation policy in England.

 

Final, 1932.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University. Final Examinations, 1853-2001 (HUC 7000.28, 74 of 284). Examination Papers, Finals , 1932.

Image Source: Edward H. Chamberlin from Harvard Class Album 1932.

 

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Taussig/Schumpeter/A.Sweezy’s final examination in value and distribution theory, 1935

 

 

In an earlier posting the course readings for the topics “Urban Rent” and “Broader Aspects of Rent” were transcribed for the team-taught course at Harvard of Taussig and Schumpeter, assisted by Alan Sweezy, on theories of value and distribution (first term, 1934-35). From the final examination questions below, we can see that the reading lists from the Harvard Archives collection of course outlines is indeed incomplete for this course. It is entirely likely that other assignments were simply written on the board as needed.

When Taussig taught the course himself in 1932-33 the course description notes “Course 7b undertakes a critical examination of current theories of wages, interest, rent, and profits, particular attention being given to Marshall’s treatment. The course is carried on mainly by discussion. It is meant primarily, though not solely, for candidates for the degree with honors. Students who have attained a grade of A or B in Economics A are admitted without further inquiry. Others must secure the consent of the instructor.”

_____________________________

Final Examination
Theories of Value and Distribution
Professors Taussig and Schumpeter, Dr. A. Sweezy

1934-35
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

ECONOMICS 7b1

  1. Are the earnings (rental) of an urban site used for retail trade a cause or an effect of prices of goods there sold? Are the earnings of a skilled craftsman cause or effect of the prices of the goods made (or services rendered) by him? Are the earnings of a business man?
  2. Does Marshall’s distinction between “situation value” and “site value” bear upon the problems of monopolistic competition? If so, why and how? If not, why not?
  3. “In estimating the utility of an entire supply of apples, we must distinguish between the total utility and the marginal utility of the stock. The total utility of a stock is obtained by adding the utility of each additional apple to that of its predecessor. It will accordingly grow until the point of satiety has been reached. Ten apples possess more total utility than five. The marginal utility of the stock, however, is always equal to the marginal utility of the final unit multiplied by the number of units. The marginal utility of two apples will be twice that of the second, of four apples four times that of the fourth.”
    Do you agree?
  4. “Real costs,” “money costs,” “expenses of production,” “supply price.” The same? If different, wherein?
  5. Are “profits,” as defined by

(1) Marshall
(2) Clark
(3) Schumpeter

to be reckoned among the expenses of production?

  1. Explain briefly two of the following:

(1) Difference between selling and production costs.
(2) Determination of equilibrium of the individual firm under conditions of monopoly and competition.
(3) Effect of product differentiation on price, costs, output of the individual firm, and profits.

 

Final. 1935.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University. Final Examinations, 1853-2001 (HUC 7000.28, 77 of 284). Examination Papers, June, 1935.

Image Source: Harvard Class Albums: Taussig (1923), Schumpeter (1939), A. Sweezy (1929).

Categories
Economic History Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Final exam for E.E. Lincoln’s US Economic History, 1921

 

 

Edmund E. Lincoln taught a two-term economic history course at Harvard. The first term was Economics 2a, European industry and commerce in the nineteenth century [already two postings here (1) Economics 2a course outline and bibliography; (2) Economics 2a course description and final examination questions]. Below a short course description and the final examination questions for the second term course, Economics 2b, Economic History of the United States. I still need to edit the long second term bibliography to include in a later posting. But those who can’t wait can still go to the copy of the List of References in Economics 2 at archive.org

_____________________________

 

Course Announcement and Description [1919-20]

[Economics] 2b 2hf. Economic History of the United States. Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., Sat., at 9.
Dr. E. E. Lincoln.

The aim will be to trace and explain the economic progress of the United States from the late colonial period to the present. The following are some of the topics that will be discussed: the development of agriculture and of the chief manufacturing industries; the change in foreign and domestic commerce; the history of transportation, including the early canal enterprises of the states, the various phases of railway building, and the establishment of public regulation of railways; the growth and decline of the merchant marine; banking and currency experiences; the history and significance of the protective tariff policy; the movement toward industrial combination.

Source: Division of History, Government, and Economics 1919-20 (2nd edition) published in Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XVI, No. 45 (October 30, 1919), p. 61.

_____________________________

 

Final Examination
Economic History of the United States
Dr. E. E. Lincoln

1920-21
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

ECONOMICS 2b

Choose any eight questions.
Answer questions in order. Plan your answers carefully before writing.

  1. Justify if possible, from the economic point of view, the following statement: “The Constitution of the United States was not based solely upon high ideals or upon abstract theories, but was a practical compromise between many conflicting interests.”
  2. Trace carefully the effect of wars upon the development of the American mercantile marine from 1789 to the present time.
  3. Show a clear knowledge of at least three state banking systems before the Civil War.
  4. Give a critical summary of the Government’s policy toward railroad labor from 1888 to the present time.
  5. Discuss in outline the chief movements in the eras outlined in the following extracts from Carver’s “Principles of Rural Economics”: “The agricultural as well as the political history of the United States is divided into two eras. The first is the Colonial era lasting from 1607 to 1776. The second is the era of national development, lasting from 1776 to our own time. This era of national development, however, is divisible into four distinct periods: first, from 1776 to 1833; second, from 1833 to 1864; third, from 1864 to 1888; and fourth from 1888 to the present time.”
  6. Explain and comment upon the statement that “the Tariff Act of 1913 manifested a great change of purpose and attitude and embodied a reversal of policy unique since the Civil War.”
  7. Write brief notes upon the following topics: The Navigation Acts, The Stamp Duties, the “Crédit Mobilier,” the Plumb Plan, the Webb Act.
  8. Explain the methods of operation and the economic significance of the “Anthracite Coal Combination.”
  9. Show a clear knowledge of the development of any one industry in the United States.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University. Final Examinations, 1853-2001 (HUC 7000.28, 63 of 284). Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Papers Set for Final Examinations: History, Church History, … , Economics, … , Fine Arts, Music, June, 1921. pp. 55-56.

Image Source: Edmund E. Lincoln from Harvard Class Album 1920.

Categories
Economic History Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. E. E. Lincoln’s final exam in European economic history, 1921

 

The final examination questions for Edmund E. Lincoln’s course on 19th century European economic history taught during the first half-year at Harvard in 1920-21 plus the description of that course from the previous year’s announcement are transcribed below. The corresponding course syllabus and ca. 30 page (!) course bibliography have been posted earlier.

In light of the current U.S. debate about “alternative facts”, question 8 of the exam is particularly interesting!

 

_____________________________

 

Course Announcements and Description [1919-20]

[Economics] 2a 1hf. European Industry and Commerce in the Nineteenth Century. Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., Sat., at 9.
Dr. E. E. Lincoln.

Course 2a undertakes to present the general outlines of the economic history of western Europe since the Industrial Revolution. Such topics as the following will be discussed: the economic aspects of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic régime, the Stein-Hardenberg reforms, the Zollverein, Cobden and free trade in England, nationalism and the recrudescence of protectionism, railways and waterways, the effects of trans-oceanic competition, the rise of industrial Germany.
Since attention will be directed in this course to those phases of the subject which are related to the economic history of the United States, it may be taken usefully before Economics 2b.

 

Source: Division of History, Government, and Economics 1919-20 (2nd edition) published in Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XVI, No. 45 (October 30, 1919), p. 61.

_____________________________

 

Final Examination
European Industry and Commerce in the Nineteenth Century
Dr. E. E. Lincoln

1920-21
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

ECONOMICS 2a1

  1. “The unsettled question in the matter of the Swiss Federal Railways is that of their financial standing.”
    Summarize Holcombe’s conclusions on this matter.
  2. “What is notable among British consolidations and associations is not their rarity or weakness so much as their unobrusiveness. There is not much display in the window, but there is a good selection inside.”
    Discuss in outline the achievements of combinations and associations of the different sorts in England.
  3. “Although the principle of most-favored-nation treatment has continued in force, the practical effect of favored-nation pledges has been limited very decidedly by increased specialization of tariff schedules.”
    Explain clearly, and indicate the significance of this statement as it bears upon modern European tariff history.
  4. Contrast the social and economic position of the English Agricultural laborer in recent years with the situation of “the peasant under the old system” (as discussed by Prothero).
  5. “Hitherto it is questionable if all the mechanical inventions yet made have lightened the day’s toil of any human being.” (Mill, “Principles of Political Economy” Book 4, Ch. V, 6th)
    Do you agree that this was true about 1860? State your arguments clearly.
  6. Indicate Russia’s relative position in the world’s economic resources, and summarize the causes of her retarded industrial development.
  7. Give the reasons for Germany’s rapid foreign trade development during the generation preceding the war.
  8. In Carlyle’s edition of Cromwell’s letters the following statement is made: “The Irish have never let the Fact tell its own harsh story to them. They have said always to the harsh Fact, ‘Thou art not that way, thou art this way.’” Do you agree or disagree with Carlyle so far as the economic aspects of Irish history are concerned? State your case with care.

 

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University. Final Examinations, 1853-2001 (HUC 7000.28, 63 of 284). Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Papers Set for Final Examinations: History, Church History, … , Economics, … , Fine Arts, Music, June, 1921. pp. 54-5.

Image Source: Edmund E. Lincoln from Harvard Class Album 1920.

 

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Final examination for B. M. Anderson’s Money and Banking, 1918

 

 

Benjamin M. Anderson taught at Harvard for five years. A syllabus and enrollment figures for his 1917-18 course “Money, Banking, and Commercial Crises” have already been posted. The final examination questions for his course, a.k.a. Economics 3, (transcribed below) come from the second term of this two-term course. Perhaps we get lucky and I, or someone else, might locate the mid-year exam for this course eventually. 

_____________________________

 

Course Announcement and Description

[Economics] 3. Money, Banking, and Commercial Crises. Tu., Th., at 1.30, with a third hour for sections on Friday morning, Friday afternoon, and Saturday morning.
Asst. Professor Anderson, assisted by Mr.—.

This course undertakes a theoretical, descriptive, and historical study of the main problems of money and banking. Historical and descriptive materials, drawn from the principal systems of the world, will be extensively used, but will be selected primarily with reference to their significance in the development of principles, and with reference to contemporary problems of public policy. Foreign exchange, speculation, and the money-market will be studied in some detail. Crises will be studied in both their industrial and their financial aspects.

Source: Division of History, Government, and Economics 1917-18 published in Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XIV, No. 25 (May 18, 1917), p. 60.

_____________________________

 

Final Examination
Money, Banking, and Commercial Crises
Assistant Professor Benjamin M. Anderson

1917-18
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

ECONOMICS 3

  1. Describe panics and crises. How may panics be controlled? How may the evils of crises be minimized?
  2. Give an account of the growth of private banks since the Civil War. What types of private banks are there? Where are the different types chiefly to be found?
  3. What evils in our monetary and banking system did the Federal Reserve Act seek to remedy? What amendments have there been to the Act? Why were these amendments made?
  4. Contrast “one-name” and “two-name” paper.
  5. Give an account of the Crisis of 1907.
  6. What theories have you met regarding bank reserves? What facts have you met by which to test these theories?
  7. What price changes have taken place during the War in the United States? How explain these price-changes?
  8. Must the value of money rest on a commodity basis?
  9. Contrast the London and the New York Stock Exchanges.
  10. Contrast the German and the English banking systems as they were before the War.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University. Final Examinations, 1853-2001 (HUC 7000.28, 60 of 284). Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Papers Set for Final Examinations: History, History of Religions, … , Economics, … , Fine Arts, Music, June, 1918. p. 43.

Image Source: Benjamin M. Anderson in Harvard Album, 1915.